DOCSLIB.ORG

Assessing Cumulative Impa Wide-Ranging Species Acro Peace

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Assessing Cumulative Impa Wide-Ranging Species Acro Peace Assessing Cumulative Impacts to Wide -Ranging Species Across the Peace Break Region of Northeastern British Columbia Prepared by: Clayton Apps, PhD, RPBio Aspen Wildlife Research Inc. For and in collaboration with: FINAL REPORT Version 3.0 June 2013 This report is formatted for double-sided printing PREFACE This report was prepared under the auspices of the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative (Y2Y). The impetus for the assessment herein was concern regarding contribution of the Site-C dam and hydro-electric development on the Peace River toward adverse regional cumulative effects. Because the underlying mandate of Y2Y pertains to advocacy for ecological connectivity from local to continental scales, my focus in this assessment has been on wide-ranging species potentially sensitive to broad-scale population fragmentation. For these species, assessing cumulative impacts specific to any one development must be considered in the context of regional populations and underlying habitat conditions and influential human activities. Hence, it is in the context of regional- scale assessment that this report considers the impacts of the Site-C development and its constraints to future conservation opportunities. While this report may be submitted by Y2Y for consideration in the environmental assessment process for the Site-C development, it is also intended to inform regional conservation planning through a wider audience that includes resource managers, resource stakeholders, private land stewards, environmental advocates, the general public, and other researchers. Recommended Citation: Apps, C. 2013. Assessing cumulative impacts to wide-ranging species across the Peace Break region of northeastern British Columbia. Version 3.0 Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative, Canmore Alberta. The author may be contacted at: [email protected] Cumulative Impacts to Wide-Ranging Species across the Peace Break Region • C. Apps • 2013 i TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS USED .................................................................................... iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... v SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. vi 1. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1 PEACE BREAK ASSESSMENT AREAS ............................................................................................. 2 Biophysical Description ................................................................................................................... 2 Human Use - Historic, Present, and Future Trend ......................................................................... 8 The Proposed Site C Hydro-Electric Dam and Impoundment ...................................................... 10 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS & CONNECTIVITY ................................................................................... 12 The Concept of Cumulative Effects .............................................................................................. 12 Importance of Regional Context ................................................................................................... 13 The Issue of Connectivity ............................................................................................................. 13 2. FOCAL SPECIES PROFILES & REVIEW ...................................................................... 16 FOCAL SPECIES SELECTION ......................................................................................................... 16 SPECIES PROFILES ......................................................................................................................... 17 Grizzly Bear .................................................................................................................................. 17 Caribou ......................................................................................................................................... 23 Fisher ............................................................................................................................................ 28 Wolverine ...................................................................................................................................... 30 Gray Wolf ...................................................................................................................................... 33 Lynx .............................................................................................................................................. 36 Fish Species ................................................................................................................................. 39 3. EVALUATING LANDSCAPE EFFECTIVENESS & CONNECTIVITY FOR FOCAL SPECIES IN THE CONTEXT OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ............................................... 44 INTENT & APPROACH ..................................................................................................................... 44 SPATIAL HABITAT & HUMAN-USE DATABASES ........................................................................... 44 ASSESSING CUMULATIVE HUMAN IMPACTS ............................................................................... 46 Modeling Landscape Potential for Focal Species......................................................................... 46 Modeling Human Influence ........................................................................................................... 49 Cumulative Impacts to Landscape Effectiveness and Connectivity for Focal Species ................ 52 RESULTS & DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................ 54 Comparison Among Scenarios & Differences Among Species .................................................... 54 Relevance of Hydro-Electric Impoundments ................................................................................ 68 4. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................... 70 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 73 LITERATURE CITED ......................................................................................................................... 74 PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS ..................................................................................................... 84 APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................... 85 Cumulative Impacts to Wide-Ranging Species across the Peace Break Region • C. Apps • 2013 ii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. The Peace River Break priority area of northeastern BC within the Y2Y ecoregion. ............. 3 Figure 2. The "Peace Break" region of northeastern BC and both the regional and local areas defined for evaluating the cumulative impact of human activity on select wide-ranging focal species.. ...... 4 Figure 3. Broad physiographic and climatic zones defining the "Peace Break" region of northeastern British Columbia and the regional and local assessment areas addressed herein. ........................ 7 Figure 4. Human population growth projections within the Peace River Regional District. ................... 9 Figure 5. Location of existing hydro-electric projects along the upper Peace River, and the proposed Site C dam and reservoir. .............................................................................................................. 11 Figure 6. Computer generated rendering of the proposed Site C dam and lower portion of the impoundment of the Peace River (www.bchydro.com). ................................................................. 11 Figure 7. A framework for modeling the cumulative effects of human activity on grizzly bears ........... 20 Figure 8. Defined grizzly bear population units, and associated status, across British Columbia ....... 21 Figure 9. Distribution of woodland caribou of the northern ecotype addressed by the Central Rockies Recovery Implementation Group (RIG) (from RICBC 2012).......................................................... 27 Figure 10. Herds and distribution of woodland caribou of the northern ecotype addressed by the North-Central Recovery Implementation Group (RIG) (from RICBC 2012). .................................. 27 Figure 11. Index of human population access/remoteness across the regional assessment area. .... 51 Figure 12. Index of human population access/remoteness across the Peace Break assessment area, projected to year 2036 given expected growth .............................................................................. 52 Figure 13. Theoretical coefficient curves of cumulative impact to each focal species as indicated by the human accessibility/remoteness index. ................................................................................... 53 Figure 14. Change in landscape effectiveness among wide-ranging focal species given current and projected-future year 2036 scenarios. Results pertain to the REGIONAL assessment area. ...... 58 Figure 15. Change in landscape effectiveness
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Incorporating Human Impacts Into Habitat Suitability Models
    INCORPORATING HUMAN IMPACTS INTO HABITAT SUITABILITY MODELS: A LITERATURE REVIEW Report Prepared for The Taku River Tlingit First Nation By Jean L. Polfus Research Assistant Round River Conservation Studies April 21, 2008 INCORPORATING HUMAN IMPACTS INTO HABITAT SUITABILITY MODELS Polfus Acknowledgments A diversity of people have assisted with the development and refinement of this report, the need for which was identified in collaborative discussions on habitat modeling between Taku River Tlingit Land and Resources Department and the British Columbia Integrated Land Management Bureau. I wish to acknowledge Kim Heinemeyer, Norm McLean and Kerrith McKay for initiating the project. The format and design of this report benefited from the influence of a literature review of the effects of energy development on ungulates by Mark Hebblewhite, who also provided guidance and advice. I thank the Heb Lab for general discussion and ideas about habitat suitability models. Kim Heinemeyer has provided helpful feedback and suggestions on earlier versions of the report. Please cite as: Polfus, J. L. 2008. Incorporating Human Impacts into Habitat Suitability Models: A Literature Review. Report prepared for the Taku River Tlingit First Nation. Cover photos: woodland caribou © Matt Grant, grizzly © Kevin Bernier, mountain goats © Sandra Leidholdt Page 2 INCORPORATING HUMAN IMPACTS INTO HABITAT SUITABILITY MODELS Polfus Table of Contents Acknowledgments..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • British Columbia Geological Survey Geological Fieldwork 1989
    GEOLOGY AND MINERAL OCCURRENCES OF THE YALAKOM RIVER AREA* (920/1, 2, 92J/15, 16) By P. Schiarizza and R.G. Gaba, M. Coleman, Carleton University J.I. Garver, University of Washington and J.K. Glover, Consulting Geologist KEYWORDS:Regional mapping, Shulaps ophiolite, Bridge REGIONAL GEOLOGY River complex, Cadwallader Group Yalakom fault, Mission Ridge fault, Marshall Creek fault. The regional geologic setting of the Taseko-Bridge River projectarea is described by Glover et al. (1988a) and Schiarizza et al. (1989a). The distributicn and relatio~uhips of themajor tectonostratigraphic assemblages are !;urn- INTRODUCTION marized in Figures 1-6-1 ;and 1-6-2. The Yalakom River area covers about 700 square kilo- The Yalakom River area, comprisinl: the southwertem metres of mountainous terrain along the northeastern margin segment of the project area, encompasses the whole OF the of the Coast Mountains. It is centred 200 kilometres north of Shubdps ultramafic complex which is interpreted by hagel Vancouver and 35 kilometresnorthwest of Lillooet.Our (1979), Potter and Calon et a1.(19901 as a 1989 mapping provides more detailed coverageof the north- (1983, 1986) dismembered ophiolite. 'The areasouth and west (of the em and western ShulapsRange, partly mapped in 1987 Shulaps complex is underlain mainly by Cjceanic rocks cf the (Glover et al., 1988a, 1988b) and 1988 (Schiarizza et al., Permian(?)to Jurassic €!ridge Rivercomplex, and arc- 1989d, 1989b). and extends the mapping eastward to include derived volcanic and sedimentary rocksof the UpperTri %sic the eastem part of the ShulapsRange, the Yalakom and Cadwallader Group. These two assemhkgesare struclurally Bridge River valleys and the adjacent Camelsfoot Range.
    [Show full text]
  • Wapiti River Water Management Plan Summary
    Wapiti River Water Management Plan Summary Wapiti River Water Management Plan Steering Committee February 2020 Summary The Wapiti River basin lies within the larger Smoky/Wapiti basin of the Peace River watershed. Of all basins in the Peace River watershed, the Wapiti basin has the highest concentration and diversity of human water withdrawals and municipal and industrial wastewater discharges. The Wapiti River Water Management Plan (the Plan) was developed to address concerns about water diversions from the Wapiti River, particularly during winter low-flow periods and the potential negative impacts to the aquatic environment. In response, a steering committee of local stakeholders including municipalities, Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation, industry, agriculture, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and the Mighty Peace Watershed Alliance (MPWA), supported by technical experts from Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP), was established. The steering committee initiated the development of a water management plan that includes a Water Conservation Objective (WCO) and management recommendations for the Wapiti River basin from the British Columbia border to its confluence with the Smoky River. A WCO is a limit to the volume of water that can be withdrawn from the Wapiti River, ensuring that water flow remains in the river system to meet ecological objectives. The Plan provides guidance and recommendations on balancing the needs of municipal water supply, industry uses, agriculture and other uses, while maintaining a healthy aquatic ecosystem in the Alberta portion of the Wapiti River basin. Wapiti River Water Management Plan | Summary 2 Purpose and Objectives of the Plan The Plan will be provided as a recommendation to AEP and if adopted, would form policy when making water allocation decisions under the Water Act, and where appropriate, under the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act by establishing a WCO for the Wapiti River.
    [Show full text]
  • Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Aboriginal Interests & Use Study On
    Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Aboriginal Interests & Use Study on the Enbridge Gateway Pipeline An Assessment of the Impacts of the Proposed Enbridge Gateway Pipeline on the Carrier Sekani First Nations May 2006 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council i Aboriginal Interests & Use Study on the Proposed Gateway Pipeline ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Aboriginal Interests & Use Study was carried out under the direction of, and by many members of the Carrier Sekani First Nations. This work was possible because of the many people who have over the years established the written records of the history, territories, and governance of the Carrier Sekani. Without this foundation, this study would have been difficult if not impossible. This study involved many community members in various capacities including: Community Coordinators/Liaisons Ryan Tibbetts, Burns Lake Band Bev Ketlo, Nadleh Whut’en First Nation Sara Sam, Nak’azdli First Nation Rosa McIntosh, Saik’uz First Nation Bev Bird & Ron Winser, Tl’azt’en Nation Michael Teegee & Terry Teegee, Takla Lake First Nation Viola Turner, Wet’suwet’en First Nation Elders, Trapline & Keyoh Holders Interviewed Dick A’huille, Nak’azdli First Nation Moise and Mary Antwoine, Saik’uz First Nation George George, Sr. Nadleh Whut’en First Nation Rita George, Wet’suwet’en First Nation Patrick Isaac, Wet’suwet’en First Nation Peter John, Burns Lake Band Alma Larson, Wet’suwet’en First Nation Betsy and Carl Leon, Nak’azdli First Nation Bernadette McQuarry, Nadleh Whut’en First Nation Aileen Prince, Nak’azdli First Nation Donald Prince, Nak’azdli First Nation Guy Prince, Nak’azdli First Nation Vince Prince, Nak’azdli First Nation Kenny Sam, Burns Lake Band Lillian Sam, Nak’azdli First Nation Ruth Tibbetts, Burns Lake Band Ryan Tibbetts, Burns Lake Band Joseph Tom, Wet’suwet’en First Nation Translation services provided by Lillian Morris, Wet’suwet’en First Nation.
    [Show full text]
  • Alberta with the Establishment of Castle the Following Conservation Achievements
    Annual Report 2017 in Review The Yellowstone to Table of contents Yukon region A letter from Jodi 3 Key advancements 4 in the Y2Y region Dawson Protected areas and 6 connected lands Solutions that help wildlife and 8 Whitehorse people thrive Advancing science and policy 10 Communities coming together 12 for conservation Partner power 14 Fort St. John Funders 16 Prince George Financials 17 Edmonton Global support 18 Banff Vancouver Calgary Our vision Seattle Spokane Missoula An interconnected system of wild lands and water stretching Bozeman from Yellowstone to Yukon, Jackson harmonizing the needs of Boise people with those of nature. Our mission Connecting and protecting habitat from Yellowstone to Yukon so that people and nature can thrive. 2 Cover: Elk nuzzle. Photo credit: Darcy Monchak. Current page: Larches at Avalanche Lake in Glacier National Park. Photo credit: Jacob W. Frank/National Park Service. Big landscape requires big vision A letter from our President and Chief Scientist ellowstone to Yukon (Y2Y) Conservation This annual report throws a spotlight on some YInitiative’s grand vision — of an of the many organizations and individuals interconnected system of wild lands and working toward a sustainable future. These waters from Yellowstone to Yukon, groups and people have contributed time, harmonizing the needs of people with funds and expert knowledge to the bigger those of nature — takes time, resources picture and we thank them for it. and commitment. Effective large-landscape Thanks to your support and shared vision for conservation requires invested and interested a healthy landscape, we are able to make the individuals. It goes beyond financial progress you can read about in these pages.
    [Show full text]
  • Williston Reservoir Bathymetry
    Peace River Project Water Use Plan Williston Reservoir Bathymetry Reference: GMSWORKS 25 Williston Reservoir Bathymetric Mapping Study Period: June 2010 to June 2013 Final Terrasond Precision Geospatial Solutions December 31, 2013 WILLISTON RESERVOIR BATHYMETRIC MAPPING GMSWORKS #25 Contract No. CO50616 Project Report Report Date: December 31, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ....................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Terms of Reference ....................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 SURVEY TEAM .......................................................................................................................... 2 4.0 SURVEY DATES .......................................................................................................................... 3 5.0 HORIZONTAL CONTROL ............................................................................................................ 4 5.1 Horizontal Datums ........................................................................................................................ 4 5.2 Horizontal Accuracy ...................................................................................................................... 4 5.3 Horizontal Control and Verification .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C: List of Other Park Systems
    APPENDIX C LIST OF OTHER PARK SYSTEMS WITHIN THE PRRD The PRRD is well served with parks of various kinds and levels within its boundaries. Although there are no national parks within the PRRD, there is an abundance of provincial parks, protected areas and ecological reserves. The PRRD encompasses a portion of one of the largest Forest Districts in the province, the Fort St John Forest District which itself has an area of approximately 4.6 million hectares. The large size is as a result of the amount of crown land in the district area. The result of all of this open space area is that when compared to other regional districts across the province the PRRD comes out well especially when regional population densities are considered. As compared to other Regional districts such as: Regional District of East Kootenay The Regional District of East Kootenay (RDEK) has 28 provincial parks, 2 conservancy protected areas, 1 national park, 6 wildlife management areas, 93 recreation sites, 66 recreation trails and 3 Ducks Unlimited properties within their land area of 27, 560 sq km and a population density of 2.0 based on a total population of 56,685. Regional District of Central Kootenay (RDCK) has 28 provincial parks, 1 wilderness conservancy park, 1 ecological reserve, 2 wildlife management areas, 49 recreation sites and 64 trails. The RDCK has a land area of 22,130.72 sq km and a 2011 population of 58,441 for a population density of 2.6 persons per sq km. Regional District ‐ Regional Parks Comparison Selected Regional District Number Population
    [Show full text]
  • Table S1: Hydrometric Stations Identification Number (Figure 1), Coordinates, Gauged Area, Daily Mean and Maximum Runoff
    Supplemental Material Journal of Hydrometeorology Linking Atmospheric Rivers to Annual and Extreme River Runoff in British Columbia and Southeastern Alaska https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-19-0281.1 © Copyright 2020 American Meteorological Society Permission to use figures, tables, and brief excerpts from this work in scientific and educational works is hereby granted provided that the source is acknowledged. Any use of material in this work that is determined to be “fair use” under Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act or that satisfies the conditions specified in Section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act (17 USC §108) does not require the AMS’s permission. Republication, systematic reproduction, posting in electronic form, such as on a website or in a searchable database, or other uses of this material, except as exempted by the above statement, requires written permission or a license from the AMS. All AMS journals and monograph publications are registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (http://www.copyright.com). Questions about permission to use materials for which AMS holds the copyright can also be directed to [email protected]. Additional details are provided in the AMS Copyright Policy statement, available on the AMS website (http://www.ametsoc.org/CopyrightInformation). 1 Supplemental Material for 2 Linking atmospheric rivers to annual and extreme river runoff in British Columbia and 3 southeastern Alaska 4 A.R. Sharma1 and S. J. Déry2 5 1Natural Resources and Environmental Studies Program, 6 University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada 7 2Environmental Science and Engineering Program, 8 University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada 9 Contents of this file 10 Figures S1 to S9 11 Tables S1 and S2 Supplementary M a t e r i a l | i 12 13 Figure S1: Time series of annual and seasonal maximum runoff for three selected 14 watersheds representing different hydrological regimes across BCSAK (Figure 1), WYs 15 1979-2016.
    [Show full text]
  • British Columbia Coastal Range and the Chilkotins
    BRITISH COLUMBIA COASTAL RANGE AND THE CHILKOTINS The Coast Mountains of British Columbia are remote with limited accessibility by float plane, helicopter or boating up its deep inlets along the coast and hiking in. The mountains along British Columbia and SE Alaska intermix with the sea in a complex maze of fjords, with thousands of islands. It is a true wilderness where not exploited by logging and salmon farming pens. But there are some areas accessible from roads that can be explored, including west of Lillooet, the Chilcotins, and the Garibaldi Range. The Coast Mountains extend approximately 1,600 kilometres (1,000 mi) long from the southeastern boundaries are surrounded by the Fraser River and the Interior Plateau while its far northwestern edge is delimited by the Kelsall and Tatshenshini Rivers at the north end of the Alaska Panhandle, beyond which are the Saint Elias Mountains. The western mountain slopes are covered by dense temperate rainforest with heavily glaciated peaks and icefields that include Mt Waddington and Mt Silverthrone. Mount Waddington is the highest mountain of the Coast Mountains and the highest that lies entirely within British Columbia, located northeast of the head of Knight Inlet with an elevation of 4,019 metres (13,186 ft). The range along its eastern flanks tapers to the dry Interior Plateau and the boreal forests of the southern Chilkotins north to the Spatsizi Plateau Wilderness Provincial Park. The mountain range's name derives from its proximity to the sea coast, and it is often referred to as the Coast Range. The range includes volcanic and non-volcanic mountains and the extensive ice fields of the Pacific and Boundary Ranges, and the northern end of the volcanic system known as the Cascade Volcanoes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement
    Volume 26 Issue 2 U.S. - Canada Transboundary Resource Issues Spring 1986 The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement Jackie Krolopp Kirn Marion E. Marts Recommended Citation Jackie K. Kirn & Marion E. Marts, The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement, 26 Nat. Resources J. 261 (1986). Available at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nrj/vol26/iss2/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Natural Resources Journal by an authorized editor of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. JACKIE KROLOPP KIRN* and MARION E. MARTS** The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement SETTING AND BACKGROUND The Skagit River is a short but powerful stream which rises in the mountains of southwestern British Columbia, cuts through the northern Cascades in a spectacular and once-remote mountain gorge, and empties into Puget Sound approximately sixty miles north of Seattle. The beautiful mountain scenery of the heavily glaciated north Cascades was formally recognized in the United States by the creation of the North Cascades National Park and the Ross Lake National Recreation Area in 1968, and earlier in British Columbia by creation of the E.C. Manning Provincial Park. The Ross Lake Recreation Area covers the narrow valley of the upper Skagit River in Washington and portions of several tributary valleys. It was created as a political and, to environmentalists who wanted national park status for the entire area, controversial, compromise which accom- modated the city of Seattle's Skagit River Project and the then-planned North Cascades Highway.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 BCGEU Convention Minutes
    M I N U T E S of the 50TH CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION of the B.C. GOVERNMENT AND SERVICE EMPLOYEES’ UNION (BCGEU) held at the HYATT REGENCY HOTEL VANCOUVER, BC JUNE 14-17, 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROCEEDINGS – 1ST SESSION ....................................................................................................... 1 Call to Order ................................................................................................................... 1 Acknowledgement of Territories ..................................................................................... 1 Elder Greeting ................................................................................................................ 1 O Canada........................................................................................................................ 1 Solidarity Forever ........................................................................................................... 1 Moment of Silence ......................................................................................................... 1 Report of the Credentials Committee .............................................................................. 1 Introductions .................................................................................................................. 2 Affiliates ......................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction of Solidarity Guests ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Food Web E.2. Electronic Appendix
    E.2. Electronic Appendix - Food Web Elements of the Fraser River Basin Upper River (above rkm 210) Food webs: Microbenthic algae (periphyton), detritus from riparian vegetation and littoral insects (especially midges) are key components supporting fish production in the mainstem upper Fraser and larger tributaries. Collector-gatherers (invertebrates feeding on fine particulate organic material) are the most abundant functional feeding group, making up to 85% of the invertebrate species on the latter two rivers. Smaller tributaries are dominated by collector, shredder and grazer insect feeding modes (Reece and Richardson 2000). There is a general increasing trend in insect abundance from the headwaters of the main river to the lower river (Reynoldson et al. 2005). Juvenile stream-type Chinook rear along the shorelines of the upper river and tributaries and some overwinter under ice as the river margins usually freeze over here. Juvenile Chinook diets in the main stem and tributaries include larval plecopterans, empheropterans, chironomids and terrestrial insects (Homoptera, Coleoptera, Hymenoptera and Arachnida; Russell et al. 1983, Rogers et al. 1988, Levings and Lauzier 1991). Rainbow trout and northern pikeminnow consume mainly sculpins in the Nechako River as well as a variety of insects (Brown et al. 1992). Stressors: Water quality and habitat conditions have changed food webs in specific locations in the upper river. However, compared to other rivers in North America, water quality is good (Reynoldson et al. 2005), even with five pulp mills currently operating in the megareach. The food web of the Thompson River was stimulated in the past by low concentrations of bleached Kraft pulp mill effluent released into the river (Dube and Culp 1997); it is not known if this is still happening as treatment techniques for effluent have changed.
    [Show full text]